Subject: Re: [boost] Survey: What should an immutable byte sequence data structure be named?
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-28 16:27:43
By the way, why can't we use "const_" as the prefix of whatever such a type would be called? Would it be too tempting to think "const foo" for "cost_foo"? Would that lead developers astray?
boost::const_sequence or boost::const_seq? If we skip the *anything* part of the sequence, we could have boost::const_buf...
On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:23 PM, David Bergman wrote:
> But is not a buffer (with its implicit assumption of being a "bunch of bytes"), since - according to DMB - it is an immutable finite sequence of "anything", i.e., the concept behind std::vector, albeit immutable, so immutable_vector.
> We should definitely separate these two concerns quite clearly and explain *exactly* what the purpose of that immutable finite sequence type is; is it intended *only* for use from text-handling "higher-level" notions? If so, why? And, where did that "sequence of *anything*" come from then?
> So: boost::immutable_vector (or boost::immutable_array, which fits better w.r.t. part of the immutability - no change of length - but fits poorly on the quite engrained tacit assumptions about an array's runtime characteristics.)
> On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:
>> I agree with Dave. Buffer.
>> Python uses "frozen" to describe the same (similar?) property for sets.
>> On Jan 28, 2011 3:10 PM, "Dave Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk